🚀 go-pugleaf

On Apr 30, 6:10 pm, "G. L. Bradford" <glbra...@insightbb.com> wrote:
> "bill" <cosmo...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message

>   Obviously you think photons of light are cannon balls you can catch up to.

Almost correct (i.e. not cannonballs) but only after we have
successfully cracked the light barrier which, as Einstein pointed out,
is a result of SR that is invalidated by the presence of a
gravitational field.

> To any traveler, no less than any other observer, all light, whether
> internal or external to it, is locally measured c. The traveler has a body
> and a complete set of [usual] physics, as does his vessel, and as does his
> local universe, frame, environment, what have you, and that must include the
> [usual] physics of light.

Light is only measured by any traveler to be c only in accordance with
the theory that his rule incurs length contraction and his clock slows
down when he is moving relatively to the source of that light compared
to when he was contained in the same RF as the source.

According to SR if a source emits a beam of light the front end of
that beam is moving at c away from the source however if the source
accelerates in the same direction as a beam of light that it is
projecting the front end of that beam as well as its constituent
photons are not moving away from the source at c. Special theory does
NOT apply to accelerating reference frames!

>   Light has no rear to run down, overrun, or outrun. Photons of light are
> not 3-dimensional cannon balls, components, or bubbles or cubes of any kind.

If a light source is illuminated for a brief period of time the end of
that beam represents 'a rear' that, if we are moving with superluminal
velocity, can be 'run down' i.e. overtaken.


> They too have no rear to run down, overrun, or outrun. They are
> 2-dimensional, single-sided (therefore [massless]) entities.

No doubt in your opinion - not in mine which is that individual
photons of light are 'quantum packages of energy' that are not 2
dimensional.

>   There is simply no such thing as coming up from behind on something which
> isn't there from behind. All light and photons you or anything else deals
> directly in is oncoming light and photons smacking you, or smacking that
> anything else, as its destination point, not departure point: Every point in
> the universe deals in light as messengers with messages directly to it, not
> ever messengers and messages going away because they have no existence to
> that side (going away). Light (or a photon) doesn't need any infinite speed
> to keep from ever being overtaken from the rear because, once more, there is
> no such thing as overtaking what isn't there -- what doesn't exist -- from
> the rear to be overtaken.

In the 'classical' 'ratification' of time dilation - the light clock -
that beam is not oncoming light and there are no photons smacking into
the observer. It IS a purely hypothetical depiction as is mine which
involves a observer looking at a far distant source that is projecting
light in both direction none of which is moving toward or smacking
into him.

>   Sheez what a purely hellish universe it would be if photons were
> 3-dimensional (...if light was 3-dimensional).
>
> GLB
>
> ===================

Beams of light have their own gravitational fields so it follows that
individual photons also generate gravity which would not be possible
if they were massless, 2 dimensional entities.